What Fiona Millar has in common with George W. Bush

I am willing to bet George Bush is not one of Fiona Millar’s favourite politicians. But it strikes me they have something important in common. They know the art of spin. They’re also very good at it. And because they and their entourage keep saying the same thing, the words that inevitably fall into the same paragraph, sentence, or even phrase, are forever associated with each other. For Millar, the words are "academies", "free schools" and "profit". For Bush, they were ‘"Iraq" and "Osama bin Laden".

Do you remember? When the then "coalition" went to war, Bush needed people to believe that bin Laden and Iraq were associated. Funny how "the coalition" these days means something entirely different and is only at war with itself. But I digress… In June 2005, Bush made a speech, where he said:

Some wonder whether Iraq is a central front in the war on terror.

Among the terrorists, there is no debate. Hear the words of Osama bin Laden: "This Third World War … is raging" in Iraq. "The whole world is watching this war." He says it will end in "victory and glory or misery and humiliation".

Every opportunity Bush had, he mentioned bin Laden when talking about Iraq. Sometimes he wouldn’t mention bin Laden by name, but would do so indirectly. In another speech, he said: "There is only one course of action against them: to defeat them abroad before they attack us at home… Our mission in Iraq is clear: we're hunting down the terrorists."

The ordinary American listened and somehow, by osmosis, eventually reached a point where he was unable to distinguish Iraq from bin Laden. So the war against Iraq was just, in their eyes, because Iraq was responsible for the fall of the Twin Towers. Whatever you may think of the war – whether or not weapons of mass destruction existed, whether Blair was Bush’s poodle, and whether or not you believed our poor boys were killed out there for nothing, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died – Bush was a master at deception.

So I am reminded of his prowess every time I hear or read Fiona Millar somehow managing to mention the word "profit" whenever she talks about free schools or academies. Never mind that there isn’t a single academy or free school out there making any profit whatsoever. Her recent piece in the Guardian is actually called "Are profit-making academies the future for education?"

She goes on, when discussing one of the academy chains E-ACT, to slyly refer to them having "the possibility of making a profit in the longer term", but she never explains what on earth she means. Much later, she cleverly quotes Martin Johnson, the deputy general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers:

We've argued for some time that many academies would struggle to go it alone and would turn to a new friend. We also predict a tendency for these friends to be swallowed up by large organisations, and ultimately by the private sector. A relaxation of the prohibition on profit is sure to follow.

While we must not forget that Johnson is the man who believes we should abandon the national curriculum in favour of lessons in walking, I am now further confused by his certainty that profit for academies is inevitable.

It is interesting that Millar should choose to quote him. On the Local Schools Network, Millar regularly speaks of profit-making free schools, and does so indirectly in ways that are reminiscent of Bush, “…as the Coalition battles to defend the vast sums of money it has spent on promoting its ideas about a free market in schools”. The free market necessarily implies profit. It is genius. And she does it all of the time.

The ordinary British person then somehow, by osmosis, gradually comes to believe that academies and free schools are about profit when this so called "fact" is entirely invented! Put it to the test. Go up to any ordinary parent in the street and ask them what they think of free schools. I bet you that somewhere in their response, you’ll find the word "profit". And we all know who put it there: Fiona and her buddies.

Maybe I’m naïve and Michael Gove is in fact planning a profit-making revolution in our education system. Or, maybe profit isn’t such a bad thing. I don’t know. But I know one thing for sure: right now, there is no reason to believe that free schools and academies are about making profit. That means that the people who keep saying so are doing it for a reason.

Maybe if I keep saying "Fiona Millar", "George Bush" and "best friends" in the same sentence, we’ll all come to believe it? Don’t laugh. More incredible feats have been achieved: the vast majority of people think free schools and academies are profit-making and there isn't an ounce of truth to it!